Make a claim against dcbl

[cherrychoc]

Good morning,

I want to take this dreadful DCBL to small claims court and would be hugely grateful of any advice. I will try to keep it as short as possible but it is quite complex.

I was aware that a debt had been referred to the High Court and was sorting paperwork ready to apply for it to be set aside when I got the notification, which did not come.
At 0605 am came a knock to my door, looking out of window I assumed the 2 men to be police and was immediately anxious thinking they could only be here to give me bad news.

I opened the door and invited them in, they
smiled and said who they were. I said I'd not received 7 day notice, they replied it had been sent. I then told them about the vulnerabilities in my home - myself, Fibromyalgia, CFS, arthritis and anxiety. My daughter who'd just turned 18 - autism, dyspraxia and related anxiety. Their response was, "you don't look vulnerable to me and it's your responsibility to keep your daughter calm when we search her room". I asked if I could set up a payment plan, they said no we are here to remove goods - this was the first visit.
They then started unplugging tvs etc and this next part was truly shocking to me, they went into my bedroom and was pulling and searching through all of my drawers including my underwear, pulling up my mattress, moving my bed to search beneath it. Every single draw, cupboard - it felt more like a police raid and I was sobbing and felt deeply violated.
I asked again what did I need to give them to prove these vulnerabilities - they did not want to know. After about 2 - 3 hours they suddenly decided that if I could raise 1850 they would then set up a payment plan, I told them there was no way i could pay that and that they would have to remove my goods. Then they were saying it was up to them to make this offer to me, that they can rule over the claim ant. I know this is not true, it was because they said my goods were only worth 300 pounds to sell on.
Oh my god - they then spent the next half hour or so constantly saying and I quote " come on, you must know people that can help you with some money, a couple of hundred here and a couple of hundred here soon mounts up". I kept replying no. They would not believe that apart from my immediate family i had become isolated and barely left the house due to my health condition. So, then they were badgering me to ask my adult daughters for money. The pressure they were putting on me was so bad that I relented and asked my 2 older daughters if they could help, but I was so upset at the unfairness of me asking them as it was my problem.

So, i paid 355 and 70 cash that was my benefits, my oldest daughter used a credit card that she had only just paid off, and paid 800 and 200 from her bank. My other daughter also paid cash and money from her bank.

These 2 men left my home with nothing but the writ, with what had been paid on it.
There was no list of the goods that they had said if I missed a £50 payment each month (I can't afford that amount ) they would come back for.
They have put fees on it for the 2 stages before their visit and also for the sale of goods which are still in my home.

There is no way i can let this rest and let them get away with it and would be very very grateful for any advice.

Many many thanks

M. K

[cherrychoc]

I've never been on any forums and I can't work out if what I've written above has been postedesigned. How will I know if it's been received. Thanks

[zeke]

Good morning,

I want to take this dreadful DCBL to small claims court and would be hugely grateful of any advice. I will try to keep it as short as possible but it is quite complex.

I was aware that a debt had been referred to the High Court and was sorting paperwork ready to apply for it to be set aside when I got the notification, which did not come.
At 0605 am came a knock to my door, looking out of window I assumed the 2 men to be police

Were they dressed like police?

If they were then they commit an offence under section 90 of the Police Act 1996, and you can report it to the police: https://www.nationalbailiffadvice.uk/Po ... gents.html

and was immediately anxious thinking they could only be here to give me bad news.

I opened the door and invited them in, they
smiled and said who they were. I said I'd not received 7 day notice, they replied it had been sent.

Proving they kept a record of the time the notice was given to the debtor, rests with the bailiff. Paragraph 7.3 of Schedule 12 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007.

Here is more: https://www.nationalbailiffadvice.uk/No ... ement.html

I then told them about the vulnerabilities in my home - myself, Fibromyalgia, CFS, arthritis and anxiety. My daughter who'd just turned 18 - autism, dyspraxia and related anxiety. Their response was, "you don't look vulnerable to me and it's your responsibility to keep your daughter calm when we search her room".

Bailiffs do not have the discretion to decide if a debtor is a vulnerable person. Here is more: https://www.nationalbailiffadvice.uk/Ba ... eople.html

I asked if I could set up a payment plan, they said no we are here to remove goods - this was the first visit.

Don't even go there. They will mess you about. There is no law stating the bailiffs must enter a controlled goods agreement. High Court agents benefit financially but NOT setting up a controlled goods agreement. With a Controlled Goods Agreement, the bailiff may only charge the first enforcement stage fee, and the 2nd enforcement stage fee only applies when you breach the agreement. They will charge both enforcement stage fees together.

They then started unplugging tvs etc and this next part was truly shocking to me, they went into my bedroom and was pulling and searching through all of my drawers including my underwear, pulling up my mattress, moving my bed to search beneath it.

Check for any missing valuables and jewellery. There is a spate of jewelry heists by High Court agents recently and the police are saying it is a civil matter.

Here is more: https://www.nationalbailiffadvice.uk/Je ... liffs.html

Every single draw, cupboard - it felt more like a police raid and I was sobbing and felt deeply violated.
I asked again what did I need to give them to prove these vulnerabilities - they did not want to know. After about 2 - 3 hours they suddenly decided that if I could raise 1850 they would then set up a payment plan, I told them there was no way i could pay that and that they would have to remove my goods. Then they were saying it was up to them to make this offer to me, that they can rule over the claim ant. I know this is not true, it was because they said my goods were only worth 300 pounds to sell on.
Oh my god - they then spent the next half hour or so constantly saying and I quote " come on, you must know people that can help you with some money, a couple of hundred here and a couple of hundred here soon mounts up". I kept replying no.

There were not interested in taking nick-nacks. They found no valuables jewellery to nick, otherwise they would have pocketed it and left, so they move on to bullying you for the cash.

They would not believe that apart from my immediate family i had become isolated and barely left the house due to my health condition. So, then they were badgering me to ask my adult daughters for money. The pressure they were putting on me was so bad that I relented and asked my 2 older daughters if they could help, but I was so upset at the unfairness of me asking them as it was my problem.

So, i paid 355 and 70 cash that was my benefits, my oldest daughter used a credit card that she had only just paid off, and paid 800 and 200 from her bank. My other daughter also paid cash and money from her bank.

These 2 men left my home with nothing but the writ, with what had been paid on it.
There was no list of the goods that they had said if I missed a £50 payment each month

Did they make a controlled goods agreement, and what paperwork did they leave?

(I can't afford that amount ) they would come back for.
They have put fees on it for the 2 stages before their visit and also for the sale of goods which are still in my home.

There is no way i can let this rest and let them get away with it and would be very very grateful for any advice.

Many many thanks

M. K

I think you need a referral to the Bar Pro Bono Unit. You can get that from any solicitor and ask that solicitor to call me in confidence and I'll do a skeleton argument statement setting out the regulations breached, and damages you are entitled. The Pro Bono unit will refer your case to a barrister willling to do the work.

[cherrychoc]

Hi, that’s great thanks so much for all of your advice. Will I be able to recover the money that I have already paid if I take them to court?

How do I go about getting a bar pro bono referral? I don’t have the money to speak with you on the phone today but could I speak to you next week? Are you available on Tuesday?

[zeke]

I have to prepare your case before making a referral. The decision-making rests with the solicitor as I only take the information and make it into a case. You get all your money back at the end of the claim. The Pro-bono solicitor is paid by the other party.

We can chat next Tuesday.

[cherrychoc]

That’s great thank you. In answer to your earlier queries, they did look like police to me, but they were dressed like they are on the tv in the black vests and white shirts. I meet 3 of the vulnerability criteria as I am disabled, unemployed and a single parent. My daughter asked about vulnerability too and he told her that it was up to him to decide. The only paperwork they left was a notice that goods have been removed for sale, but they didn’t take anything. They also didn’t make any kind of list of goods or anything like that.

How will I be able to contact you on Tuesday? Through the contact form on the site?

[zeke]

The contact form will send you the contact details. It depends where I am because I travel a lot.

[cherrychoc]

Ok, thank you. I will do the contact form on Tuesday and wait for further instruction from you.
Many thanks

[John The Baptist]

Disabled, unemployed and being a single parent does not make you vulnerable as far as enforcement is concerned.

Dressing in dark uniforms is not an offence.

Your whole argument appears to centre around whether a notice of enforcement was sent.

Do not use a skeleton argument that has been drafted by "Schedule 12" as it will not be worth the paper that it is printed on. I have seen a skeleton argument drafted by "Schedule 12" and quite frankly, it looks like the work of a 12 year old. Not only was there an appalling misunderstanding of legislation but there was also no real argument at all. "Schedule 12" thinks this is some kind of game whereby he can list a few regulations and pass it off as a skeleton argument.

Skeleton arguments require a great deal of skill and experience to draft. "Schedule 12" has neither. In my humble opinion, skeleton arguments are one of the most difficult of all documents to draft. They certainly should not be attempted by laymen.

[zeke]

Small claims track doesn't require a skeleton argument.

[John The Baptist]

There is no small claim.

This is a simple dispute over whether a NoE has been sent.

I think that a solicitor should be able to cope with that without the need to trouble you for a skeleton argument.

[zeke]

You said:

Disabled, unemployed and being a single parent does not make you vulnerable as far as enforcement is concerned.

The official guidelines published by the Ministry of Justice states:

• 77. Some groups who might be vulnerable are listed below.
  
  i) the elderly;
  
  ii) people with a disability;
  
  iii) the seriously ill;
  
  iv) the recently bereaved;
  
  v) single parent families;
  
  vi) pregnant women;
  
  vii) unemployed people; and,
  
  viii) those who have obvious difficulty in understanding, speaking or reading English.

Source: Paragraph 77 of the Taking Control of Goods National Standards

It is the court that has the final say on whether a person is vulnerable. Not the draughtsman.

Our job is to gather and present the facts, it is the solicitor's job to sign them off, it is the court's job to adjudicate.

[John The Baptist]

Until you understand what vulnerability means for the purpose of enforcement, it’s pointless continuing.

To be vulnerable in terms of enforcement, your condition or circumstances must impair your ability to manage your finances. The conditions stated by the OP do not fall into the vulnerability category and there is nothing for a court to determine.

[zeke]

To be vulnerable in terms of enforcement, your condition or circumstances must impair your ability to manage your finances.

The OP wants to make a small claim. Not a power of attorney.

[Syd Snitkin]

Vulnerability includes financial vulnerability in that enforcement would be disproportionately punitive. It could include single parents, the unemployed and so forth, but is not a given. The NS have really tried to cover the issue but bailiff's are ignoring them. They have been given the 'power' to identify possible vulnerable situations but there's a financial disincentive in doing so, as any enforcement fees are removed pending the assessment.

Vulnerability doesn't mean, as has been said on here elsewhere, that you are exempt from all fees - only that the bailiff should withdraw, refer to the creditor and allow the debtor to seek advice.

In this case, the OP told the bailiffs of her daughters conditions and what they should not be doing is then turning the place upside down and rifling through knicker drawers. But we're talking about DCBL aren't we? I would even hazard a guess that we're talking about Gary judging by the front-loaded fees.

[John The Baptist]

To be vulnerable in terms of enforcement, your condition or circumstances must impair your ability to manage your finances.

The OP wants to make a small claim. Not a power of attorney.

Then you should be telling the OP that there are no grounds to make a claim, not lead the OP up the garden path with claims of pro bono solicitors paid for by the other party.

[John The Baptist]

Vulnerability includes financial vulnerability in that enforcement would be disproportionately punitive. It could include single parents, the unemployed and so forth, but is not a given. The NS have really tried to cover the issue but bailiff's are ignoring them. They have been given the 'power' to identify possible vulnerable situations but there's a financial disincentive in doing so, as any enforcement fees are removed pending the assessment.

Vulnerability doesn't mean, as has been said on here elsewhere, that you are exempt from all fees - only that the bailiff should withdraw, refer to the creditor and allow the debtor to seek advice.

In this case, the OP told the bailiffs of her daughters conditions and what they should not be doing is then turning the place upside down and rifling through knicker drawers. But we're talking about DCBL aren't we? I would even hazard a guess that we're talking about Gary judging by the front-loaded fees.

Enforcement by selling a prrson’s goods is punitive to everyone. On average, the goods sell for 25% of their real value.

Bailiffs are used only when all other attempts to recover the debt have failed. It’s not an option to ignore all previous contact and then think you can pull a rabbit out of the hat when the bailiff calls. The time to claim vulnerability is before the matter reaches crisis point. Unemployed and single parents have to repay debts just as everyone else does. If they refuse then they face the same prospects as everyone else. The alternative would mean that debts owed by the poor are unenforceable. The NS also provide protection for poor people not to be pressured into making unsustainable repayment agreements.

It is wrong to think that your goods are exempt just because you are poor.

[Syd Snitkin]

That's not what I said. If the debtor is a single mum on benefits with an autistic child, there is no benefit in taking away the few goods she has whilst adding more to the debt. The TV may be essential to her child, the console may be used for his benefit, etc. In these circumstances the bailiff should withdraw and refer back to the debtor.

In such circumstances, enforcement would be disproportionately or excessively punitive.

The problem we're seeing is that the vulnerability excuse is being abused and is being advised as the first stop.

DCBL do dress like coppers, and I believe this is deliberate. There is no reason why they cannot wear, say, red shirts.

[John The Baptist]

The threat of removal is the bailiff’s strongest weapon. That is what happened here. No goods were actually taken. If the bailiff has had to use this threat, it could be argued that ES2 is applicable.

The uniform argument is difficult to advance although I do get the reasons.

It is not for a court to determine vulnerability. That is just another of Nigel’s misconceptions.

[zeke]

I haven't seen DCBL wear police markings recently after they were pulled up for it when the Paul Bohill photoshoot images were published.

There is a complaint in-hand involving a Rossendale bailiff driving a van with police-like Battenburg markings down the side, but I expect that to be dismissed because the bailiffs used blue and white where police Battenburg markings are blue and yellow.

[zeke]

It is not for a court to determine vulnerability. That is just another of Nigel’s misconceptions.

In a detailed assessment, it's always the court that decides. Bailiffs don't even get notice of the application.

[John The Baptist]

It is not for a court to determine vulnerability. That is just another of Nigel’s misconceptions.

In a detailed assessment, it's always the court that decides. Bailiffs don't even get notice of the application.

But you argue that bailiffs aren't qualified to determine vulnerability. In that case, surely judges aren't either?

At least you're moving in the right direction. A DA is far more sensible than your previous nonsense about solicitors contacting you for a skeleton argument and pro-bona solicitors, paid for by the other side.

Out of interest, how is that gathering and presenting facts? It is stating something that is not going to happen. How does it help the OP?

[zeke]

But you argue that bailiffs aren't qualified to determine vulnerability. In that case, surely judges aren't either?

Judges can adjudicate. Bailiffs cannot.

At least you're moving in the right direction. A DA is far more sensible than your previous nonsense about solicitors contacting you for a skeleton argument

Solicitors request the case is prepared to court ready forms. They can amend it but they always sign it off. A detailed assessment doesn't need a skeleton any more than an Interpleader claim.

and pro-bona solicitors, paid for by the other side.

Any solicitor and the CAB can make a referral to the Bar Pro Bono Unit. There is a list of conditions that need to be met, but if a case meets them then I will put it forward for a referral.

Out of interest, how is that gathering and presenting facts?

It's putting the evidence and chronology together to give the referring solicitor a starting point. The summary is read first and from there, the solicitor decides whether to take it on.

It is stating something that is not going to happen.

????????????~

How does it help the OP?

When a client has a solicitor acting for them, it gives them a whole new power they did not have access to otherwise.

[Michelle]

DCBL do dress like coppers, and I believe this is deliberate. There is no reason why they cannot wear, say, red shirts.

There is, they could be mistaken for Arsenal players and get beaten up!

[Syd Snitkin]

And deservedly so.

[John The Baptist]

Judges can adjudicate. Bailiffs cannot.

Judges cannot determine who is vulnerable for the purposes of enforcement. However, if the debtor is able to manage his/her own financial affairs, it is doubtful that (s)he will be deemed vulnerable as far as enforcement is concerned. A bailiff is trained to look for tell tale signs of vulnerability and makes a decision based on this. If it is serious then it is right to report back to the creditor. In this case, the OP's conditions were not serious so there wasn't a need to report back.

Solicitors request the case is prepared to court ready forms.

No they do not. Who in the right frame of mind is going to ask someone like you to construct legal documents? You have no training, no experience and very little understanding of legislation.

Any solicitor and the CAB can make a referral to the Bar Pro Bono Unit. There is a list of conditions that need to be met, but if a case meets them then I will put it forward for a referral.

You told the OP in this case that you would put it forward. WHY????? She is not vulnerable for enforcement purposes and the only dispute appears to be whether a NoE was sent out.

It's putting the evidence and chronology together to give the referring solicitor a starting point

Having seen your drafts, one of the biggest criticisms I have with them is that you lack the ability to put things in a chronological order. The drafts jump about all over the place.

????????????~

You told the OP that the pro-bono unit would refer the case to a barrister who was willing to do the work. That is not going to happen is it?

When a client has a solicitor acting for them, it gives them a whole new power they did not have access to otherwise.

I repeat - How is that going to help the OP? No solicitor will take the work on without being paid and there is no chance whatsoever of a successful referral to the pro-bono unit. I don't know why you suggested that there was and suspect that it was because you wanted to show off, claiming that you draft skeleton arguments for solicitors. Remember what we said recently about people trying to be something that they are not on the internet?

You have acted reprehensibly in this matter and gave the OP false hope when in fact there was none.

[cherrychoc]

Good morning.

I'm so sorry that I didn't contact you on Tuesday, I wasn't at all well and i apologise for any inconvenience.
I am very keen to get things moving on this situation, but sadly my funds can't stretch to the consultation fee this week.

Paying the hceos that week has really messed my finances up and I'm struggling to get back on track, and having to pay £50 per month to them really isn't helping. But, as I said, I really want dcbl to face the consequences of their utter disregard of The Taking Control Of Goods National Standards 2014.

I read on here that there are instances where it's possible to ask the bank to refund the money back to my account and I was very close to doing just that the other week. But then I got a knot of anxiety that it would bring them back to my house to remove my goods, even though, I don't have a list of what they took control of and have requested four times to be sent it. So I don't know if that would be the right thing to do. So far I personally have paid them £525, but do you think it would be a mistake?


I would like to say that I think this site you have set up is absolutely fantastic. It is dreadful what bailiffs are getting away with and finding your site and reading all that I have on here was what spurned me on to pursue.
In a time when legal aid is virtually impossible for so many different cases it really is a gift to come across this - thank you

[zeke]

Good morning.

I'm so sorry that I didn't contact you on Tuesday, I wasn't at all well and i apologise for any inconvenience.
I am very keen to get things moving on this situation, but sadly my funds can't stretch to the consultation fee this week.

No rush. DWB is full until next week anyway.

Paying the hceos that week has really messed my finances up and I'm struggling to get back on track, and having to pay £50 per month to them really isn't helping. But, as I said, I really want dcbl to face the consequences of their utter disregard of The Taking Control Of Goods National Standards 2014.

I read on here that there are instances where it's possible to ask the bank to refund the money back to my account and I was very close to doing just that the other week.

If its abank transfer, its nigh impossible to reverse a transaction. Its alright to reverse a card transaction, especially a card transaction. Here is how to make a chargeback

But then I got a knot of anxiety that it would bring them back to my house to remove my goods, even though, I don't have a list of what they took control of and have requested four times to be sent it.

If you don't a list of controlled goods, then they are not controlled goods. The regulations say the bailiff must give an "inventory" when making a controlled goods agreement. Here are the rules on making a controlled goods agreement.

So I don't know if that would be the right thing to do. So far I personally have paid them £525, but do you think it would be a mistake?


I would like to say that I think this site you have set up is absolutely fantastic. It is dreadful what bailiffs are getting away with and finding your site and reading all that I have on here was what spurned me on to pursue.
In a time when legal aid is virtually impossible for so many different cases it really is a gift to come across this - thank you

In the most dire cases, you can be referred to the pro-bono unit, but you have to pass a test of eligibility.